 Yes, he's out the order regular meeting of capitol the city council April the 11th roll call, please Councilmember story here councilmember Peterson here councilmember Brooks here mayor Bertrand here pledge allegiance To the fight of the United States of America and to the republic One nation under God in the visible with liberty and justice for all Have some presentation so I could call for the police chief to introduce a new officer Good evening. Mr. Mayor council members I'm really happy pleased to be in front of you tonight to introduce our newest police officer with the capitol police department Mike Kilroy Mike was sworn in on March 15th after an abbreviated abbreviated post training Academy He currently is in phase training with officer Guillermo Vasquez. Perhaps you've seen him on patrol During the mid-shift hours Mike brings with him 20 years of previous law enforcement experience with the Phoenix police department Which is very beneficial for us. So we're really happy that we're able to attract Mike and and bring him back home He can talk about that Mike is married has been married for 24 years to his wife Lisa Who's here in the front row with their daughters Lauren 14 years old and Alyssa who's 12 years old also in town for this Presentation to council is Mike's father Mike senior Is that appropriate close enough? So I'd like to on behalf of the entire city council, of course in the police department I'd like to formally welcome Mike Kilroy to the capitol of police department and give him a chance to say a few things to counsel Thank you mayor counsel. Thank you for having me and I appreciate the time that you've provided me today As chief McManus said I do have prior law enforcement experience in a rather large department And I'd like to just say that I am Overly impressed with what was sold to me as a sleepy beach town for a small department the amount of work that the men and women here do for The citizens it's it's pretty amazing the amount of depth that they are not only required to but Excel at and getting into and investigations Not having specialty details like I was lucky enough to have in Phoenix where if we had a big scene Basically, we hold it and allow the details to come in and investigate So the men and women that you have here so far are have been amazing I'm I'm extremely impressed like I said with their investigative and work ethics And I'm just very happy to be a part of this family now. Thank you. Thank you With that I call to you the city clerk. Do we have any additional material? Yes, we received one public comment for item 8b and three public comment items for 8d those arrived later today and Are available on the dais and in the back Any additions and deletions to the agenda? I have a deletion I'd like to pull item B. Excuse me 8b consideration of village decoration policy to be Agenda is at a future time So moving along public comments this point of order don't we need to vote on Continuing an item I Did not know I do think that that's actually the best process. Okay. My apologies I'd like to consider a vote on this item Could I just ask what yeah the reason for continuance? Ed has been leaving this effort and he has not been able to prepare his report in conjunction with the BIA All right. Thank you. I Just wanted to say if there are those who are in attendance today, we may want to give them the opportunity But if we're going to hold it at another date, I would like a motion for a specific date just so that they would be informed Duly noted Is there a motion to let's say what would be because I haven't talked to Ed about this All I know is that he requested to remove this. I believe we can continue it to the next meeting The next meeting is pretty full, but I don't think this is too much of an item to put on there I won't be at the next meeting Should we put it out to meetings first meeting in May? May 2nd, I believe so I move we continue this to May 2nd Okay Terms of order are there any public comments on this? Karen I see you sneaking up. No, okay. No public comments All those in favor Can we clarify a motion and second please? Yeah, I made the motion. I'll second. Okay, sorry Okay, all those in favor any opposed no, okay moving along now We're at a time for public comments. You get three minutes to talk. Thank you I'll be much shorter than that Karen Hannah The I'm here on behalf of the BIA at our last board of directors meeting we Voted unanimously to ask Vice Mayor Kristen Peterson to be our liaison to the BIA and she has graciously accepted so she'll be coming to our board meetings and Bringing information back or be able to answer answer questions for you and answer questions for us And we really appreciate her being able to do that. Thank you looking forward to it. Thank you excellent choice More comments. Thank you I just wanted to thank the city council as well as capital police department on behalf of All my neighbors on Topaz Street the calming efforts While there's still people that aren't Maybe obeying the law and and running the signs It has been a big relief for us and I really appreciate it Well, thank everyone because this has been an effort that's been ongoing for a couple years And I know that capital BD is we've seen them out there The last couple weeks in forcing and it's really helped. Thank you Thank you very much Any other comments from the public? Okay, bringing it back to city council and staff comments Okay So just two weeks ago. I was able to volunteer at the live oak Senior Resource Center where my four-year-old and I were able to help feed the seniors that come in from all throughout the county I highly recommend anybody who has an hour to Attend it's a Monday Wednesday or Friday noon slot that they welcome any support From the community and they're also looking for drivers to deliver the food through their meals on wheels Program in addition to that. I was also able to attend the seniors in isolation What are they what is this called the art show at the mall museum and It was beautifully done that they're gonna have that going on for a few more months and I've brought some of their cards and then lastly Vice mayor Peterson and I were able to attend the 2020 census Press release and I know we have some people in the audience to talk a little bit more about that Thank you Yeah, I just have a quick comment next Wednesday, April 17th The community action board is going to be having a public forum on their community action plan It starts at 615. It's at the community foundation in Aptos and it's an opportunity to hear about the community action plan and for the community to provide feedback on their Experiences with poverty and the causes of poverty in Santa Cruz County So, um, so you went to it's working I thought if I may mayor. Yeah, you may. Thank you I wanted to announce that At the McGregor stick skate park on May 11th on McGregor Street The Capitola Police Department is sponsoring a skate tola And it's going to be from 11 a.m. To 3 p.m. In the afternoon There's going to be skating demonstrations We're going to actually unveil the new mirrored mural that's in Painted at the park the artists will be there as well So I would just encourage all the residents, please come out Support the kids support the police department and have a good time, you know with the skating demonstrations I also wanted to ask You know, we just heard a Compliment from a resident on top has about the actions that the city council took to restrict the traffic And I did want to ask that we have asked staff to do a follow-up evaluation and maybe Bring to us their plan for evaluating the You know the the activities or the infrastructure that we put in there And the turn restriction signs we of course get a lot of comments and and they're good and bad But I think that we should it'd be educational for us to look at the effectiveness for what we've done For maybe for future reference and also whether we can take some of these positive results And maybe implement them on some of the other streets You know without you know impinging because sometimes when you take do things on one street It just pushes the problem elsewhere So I think it would be good for us to follow up with what's gone on there and seeing if we can One have a formal report and then see if we need to take any further activities there Mr. City manager Council member story staffs plan at this point has been to we were intending to begin traffic counts in May and Conduct traffic counts and once we had the data we have the before The installation and after the installation and come back with the report with the traffic data the report from the police chief about Enforcement's gone, so it probably would be some point in June. Is that me with your council's expectations? Oh, I think yeah, I think that that's a reasonable time frame to do an effective evaluation And maybe I would like to maybe just see which particular streets we're going to do the counts on Just to make sure that we're comprehensive and and looking at not just topaz, but the adjacent streets as well and Hopefully, you know, we will verify that we've had some positive results there Thank you. Thank you for that staff. Okay. Sorry. I didn't think you had a comment, but you certainly did I also went Meals and wheels to some people's homes and delivered meals and I was quite surprised I knew quite a few of the people and You know, I did not know that these people were getting meals from meals and wheels And it was quite humbling. These are people that I see all the time someone that I've actually known for 25 years friend of my mother's and so These are people in your neighborhood these are people in the community that you see and know all in the course of shopping or whatever it is and Sometimes you're neat. So it's very humbling and Also in terms of humbling I went to something today that was truly remarkable, I think and the beautiful thing about it was it was a Great showing of how strong our community is From young to old from babies crying from older people that you know, we're helped to get there by their caregivers and This to me is a wonderful thing about this community so Be involved Look around you The first story the first event that I just told you events Excuse me about some of I know them for a long time. There's people in this community reach out to them Take your part to be a member of the community that is your community right now It makes it stronger It helps people in their need and they may in turn help you. Thank you Staff comments Mr. Mayor members of council, there's two items I just wanted to bring your attention the first was that yesterday the Coastal Commission approved our permits for the jetty In flume which really kudos to public work team It took a little bit of last-minute negotiating based on some comments that we got from surf rider But we were able to get the permit. So that's a great great achievement Secondarily, I just also wanted to let everybody know that the fastest Easter egg hunt in the West will be taking place on April 20th Shalt is I think it takes place between 11 and 1101 out on the beach so be on time or This out it's not coming up on the 20th. That's Saturday not this Saturday, but the next yes, don't blink City clerk Okay, so let's move on to the consent to calendar We have a consent calendar any items from the consent calendar Council would like to pull Any items from the consent calendar public would like to pull That I like to your motive this consent calendar second Second, okay. It's been moved in second although some favor So the passes on to items in general government public hearings So we have consider resolutions supporting census 2020 complete count committee And is there a staff report or we definitely have people that are gonna speak you have a step report, okay? Mr. Mayor members of council, I'm just gonna do a very short introduction This item is on your agenda this evening to consider approving a resolution and support of the overall complete count committee and census Efforts for Santa Cruz County the City of Capitola has been participating along with help from the mayor and the complete count committee for this county And so what would be on your agenda for recommended for approval this evening is a resolution and support of the overall census efforts to make Sure that everyone in the City of Capitola is counted in the upcoming 2020 census and in addition to direct staff to appropriate $5,000 in next year's budget as our portion of the overall effort to fund The census outreach efforts in the county so with that I will turn it over to our partnership specialist with the census Tori Del Favreau who will give us a little bit more information Good evening mayor and council. Thank you so much for having us on the agenda tonight I also appreciate two of your council members coming it to our kickoff event for the county of Santa Cruz that took place Last week on April 2nd It's critical that we have a full and accurate count not only in Capitola, but Santa Cruz County at large As you know, we don't all just stay in Capitola, so we need to make sure that we actually have an accurate count In our city in our county in our state and nationwide There's $675 billion that are of federal funds that are appropriated based on census numbers so we need to make sure that We get our fair share Just a little history California is a giver not a giver getter of federal taxes So the state of California is absolutely in the game to make sure that California is not under counted and for that to happen We need to do things like Jacques just said reaching out to our community members and reaching out to the hard-to-count Populations and highlighting why it's important that they self-respond to the census the census is going to be different in 2020 they are going to have self-respond available via the internet and that's going to open up in March of 2020 so what that means is everybody will get a mailer at home Highlighting to go online and fill at the census to self-respond if that doesn't take place There will be some follow-up mailers and eventually a paper form will come home But the goal is to save federal funds to have everybody self-respond from the beginning To be brutally honest a lot of the feedback that I'm getting in the community is there's some mistrust in the federal government right now So what's going to be required is our trusted messengers in the community go out and touch those people and talk to them and tell them Why the census is important and why they should? Talk to their neighbors talk to fellow parents at their schools to make sure that the census efforts are taking place And people are aware of what it means to them whether it means free and reduced lunches in their kids school Or whether it means fixing potholes You know up on Summit Road. There's lots of opportunities to figure out ways that federal funding affects everyone in the community So along those lines, I really appreciate you guys having this on the agenda tonight The Santa Cruz County has been working really hard with the community action board to set up a plan a strategic plan for a full and accurate count in the county And additionally I found out that we have a little census celebrity in town that lives here in Capitola And so since we had this meeting tonight, I thought of course I'm gonna invite our in-town census celebrity This gentleman was in charge of the 1980 decennial census He's been appointed by two different presidents to the Census Bureau Which is I think the the only person to actually do that in the history of the Census Bureau And even by two different parties, which is very exciting in our current climate So I'm gonna turn it over to Vince Baraba and hopefully he can go deeper on the census because he's a year or two older than me And he might have some good information to share with you guys. Thank you Welcome Vince. Thank you Well, if I'm only a year or two older, you're really holding your age quite well What's going on in society today in our government is Causes real problems for an agency like the United States Census Bureau Which relies on the trust of the American people? It is the largest activity that ever takes place in this country that takes place every ten years And it does so because it's part of the Constitution. That's how we allocate the Congress of the United States This year it got even a little more difficult because the administration decided to want to add a citizenship question To the question questionnaire Everybody I know who knows anything about taking the census Thinks that's a bad idea In fact, the five of the former directors of the Census Bureau Provided an amicus brief to the Supreme Court ruling. It was gonna rule on it in April 23rd, I believe now I Strongly believe that question will not be included because the case against it is really quite strong Three federal court judges have said it's quite strong and they've ruled against it So Supreme Court would have to ignore all three of those judges Now if for some reason it stays in there's a point I want to make and how we deliver a message Census information is protected by Title 13 of the United States Code And that title says that if anybody releases information about an individual to someone other than that individual They are subject to severe penalties sometimes including jail time And the Census Bureau has a historical record of never having released information About an individual because of title 13 of the US Code and because they know that if it ever happened The ability to collect information would be severely hampered So I think the message that I have for us here and throughout the state of California is one of the motivations for adding the citizenship question to some states including I think it was a Conservative Nebraska senator is trying to get legislation passed in his state And if they do ask the citizenship question when they do districting within the state That they will do it only with citizens Now I don't think we'll have that problem in the state of California Given our legislature in its position But we're gonna have to make it clear to the population if that does happen that they will not be affected individually and Given basic structure of our legislature. They're not likely to be affected legislatively either So it's from the position of a state of California It'd be good to question wasn't asked, but if it was asked it shouldn't have a negative effect on how things are implemented in the state and I think the key message I want to deliver is We really need to put together a communications Program to people who might feel they could be subjected to some harm if they identified on the census that their Individual information is protected by law and it's a law that's been on the records for a long time And it's never been violated. So it's important I think in the discussions that you have with the community and particularly a community like ours That we get that message across quite strongly And I don't know how much time I got but I'd be happy to answer any questions that you might have The timer was not even turned on So this is pretty important. So any questions of two individuals that have spoken more Vince, maybe If I may What more can we as the city do to help? I know we've had the public event and you doing your presentation, but beyond that Are there other things that the city can do to get the message out to let people know how important it is and how Protected and privileged the information is but you have the ability to communicate directly You have mechanisms in place to get a message to every citizen who was registered within the city So I would recommend that you just come up with a message Sorry could help you put that together that would go out with your recommendation and let people know that how important it is That should be counted I'm just gonna add in I know that everybody on the council, you know, you guys have a lot of You have a lot of layers in the community So and as do people that are listening to this council this council meeting and you know reading communication from the city So sometimes it really just takes a first-person message So if anybody you know can think of a group that it would be advantageous to talk to you know We're kind of starting on the macro level and hopefully really get down to the granular level Come census day and really be working with like, you know, for example, the English learners advisory council at the elementary schools So but beyond that like invite us to stuff. I'd be happy to come speak at anything You know, I'm sure that I could maybe get fence to come with me to one or two things But we would love to be out in the community and make sure that our messaging is heard and you know touching those people that touch the next person I would just like to add that I would encourage Tori you and if Vince would come back as we get closer to the actual March 2020 date just to keep it fresh As much as you can. Yeah, thank you It's only a couple block walk for me I Don't have any questions. I do want to thank you for being here and sharing that information I've heard a lot about it through my work with cab and one of the things I found was really important was that every person is counted Equals about $2,000 in funding and I think that's a really important number to keep in keep in mind It's just just submitting your one census answer as additional $2,000 in funding for your community And I think that's really important. So thank you both. I would only add one other thing and I mentioned earlier I served on the redist on the Judiciary Commission of the state of California this year or last last 10 years, I guess and And we had access to all the information that we needed now one of the reasons they wanted to add the Citizenship question is they claim that they needed that information for making sure the voting rights act Was properly deployed in the redistricting. I Could tell you that we use what they called the American Community Survey to identify the information we needed to demonstrate that the Districts we created met the requirements of the voting rights act and they were approved by the Attorney General so this argument that you need since the citizenship data to demonstrate that it's it's required for the voting rights act is It's the wrong. It's a bad story and it's just absolutely not needed Thank you Thank you So we have a recommended action. Is there any discussion the motion in this regard? Well, I'm happy to make a motion that we approve staff recommendation on this item But I wonder if there was if you want to ask for any other public input. Okay. Thank you very much for prompting me Is there anyone from the audience who would like to make some comments about this item on the agenda? Seeing none, let's bring it back to council for a motion I made the motion. Okay Okay, so all those in favor aye and so it passes So let's move on to item C Introduce an ordinance amending chapter 9 of the capital municipal called pertaining to cannabis There is staff report on this Welcome captain Good evening mayor council members and city staff I'm here this evening to propose an ordinance to amend chapter 9.6 1 regarding Cannabis sales processing and cultivation My proposal this evening is to remove the prohibition on retail sales and update some language in the ordinance as a result of the November 2018 General election capital residents passed measure I authorizing a Retail tax on cannabis sales the cat the city's original prohibition on commercial cannabis is established in section 9.6 1 The proposed ordinance amendment Updates approved chapters 5.36 regarding retail cannabis licensing and also section 1 7.2 4 Point 0 to 0 regarding zoning codes for retail cannabis This ordinance will allow for the retail cannabis businesses After they receive a capitol a retail cannabis permit and also a conditional use permit In addition this ordinance will amend the the term marijuana to cannabis or move some Reductant a redundant language and so I'm open for any questions Questions of the captain Yeah captain deli. Yeah, thanks for bringing this forth. I Could never believe that we would be doing such a thing in all my life, but I Guess the one question and concern I had is in reading the ordinance Do we still have a prohibition even if it's a licensed retailer from deliveries home deliveries of Marijuana as far as the deliveries This would not be a part of a part of that so there there still would be they would still be prohibited. I mean I So under recent California law the city is prohibited from not allowing we can't stop deliveries into the city I think there's still an open legal question about whether one of our own Retail businesses whether they could conduct delivery activity within the city I don't think that has been established yet, but it's pretty clear that at this point we can't prohibit deliveries into the city This doesn't affect this This is really a cleanup piece that gets rid of our blanket prohibition on all commercial cannabis and says it's a blanket prohibition Except for those as allowed under our retail licensing ordinance, right? And I wasn't necessarily speaking about deliveries into the inventory. I mean it has to get into the Outlet in some manner But I was thinking more would the approved retailer at some point be able to Offer up a home delivery service You know through the apps You know my daughter orders cookies at midnight, you know from And I don't know where but they arrive at the door But so I was a little concerned about whether those kinds of Activities may follow our come on the heels of approving this ordinance so What's gonna happen here? Not related to this ordinance, but under our retail licensing ordinances will be identifying two potential candidates for retail cannabis license And then they'll be moving through the entitlement process through the planning commission And I think at that point we'd ask ourselves some pretty serious questions And we have some legal questions that we're gonna have to work through about Can the city prohibit a delivery activity to residents to take from taking place at one of our at our retailers And is it desirable? You know is it better to say that we want deliveries to local residents from a local store Which we regulate to some degree or we don't want to have the deliveries and we'd rather Rather than come from elsewhere. And so that's something we're gonna stop to work through independent of this Okay, could I ask maybe just for a follow-up to the council on those discussions and as that progresses and Of course. Thank you. I see the captain coming forward. Did you have a question answer? No? Excuse me the chief. Excuse me. Okay. Yeah, okay Okay, any more questions, okay If you stay there just for a second anyone from the audience would like to Speak on this particular topic Okay, seeing none come back to the city council. Thank you very much captain Okay, we have a recommended action to provide some money and to also Make a motion on this I'll make a motion to Approve the ordinance amending chapter 9 of the Capitola Municipal Code pertaining to cannabis Okay, motion. I'll second in a second. Okay, any more discussion? No, all those in favor? Okay, so passes So on to revise zone code for coastal commission certification. We have a staff report Okay, good evening mayor and council I hate to interrupt but mayor if I may I would like to request that on this the zoning code Item that the parts of it that pertain to the monocle be bifurcated as I have a Conflict I live within 500 feet of the monocle and So I you know, I have a residential Conflicting property interests, so I would like to maybe ask that that portion of it be Split out in terms of the staff report and of course the discussion and any final approval I'll leave it at your discretion whether to do it at the beginning Which I will step out and come back in or do it at the end and then I will just step out at that point Okay, Katie in terms of your report What works better at the beginning at the end? I think there's some folks from the public here to Hear that item. It's I think the second or third item in my presentation So either way works for me. I can skip those slides. We can come to it at the end or I Can start off there or you could go out and come back either one. Yeah at your discretion I'm happy to go out now and you could Yeah, notify us when you get to that slide and Councilman story would be excused and then come back. Okay, that works. All right I'd like to mention also that I will need to recuse myself from discussion five based on Conversation of the village hotel because I will be or a potential village hotel because I will I Also live within 500 feet of that location, so I will need to recuse myself from that part of the conversation Great. Okay, so we have to Hey, okay do If I may do we need to say at forefront that we need to table those items since there's It would be a potential vote. I Think you can take action and when when we get to those items Okay, so you know potentially only have a three for any particular buzz once we have the quorum, okay So Katie, thank you. So first I'd like to thank you. You had quite a bit of homework this past weekend leading up to tonight over the Course of since 2014. We've been working on the zoning code update But in the this is a new year and we've got new council members And so taking a first look at this with our with the most recent updates provided from the Coastal Commission staff It was a big undertaking. So thank you for your time put into this document and review up to this state they We did substantial public outreach went through an issues and options period a draft code in 2016 went out and then started adoption hearings in 2017 and our zoning code was adopted by city council last January 2018 And since January of 2018, I've been working closely with the Coastal Commission staff I want to make it really clear that this has not been reviewed by the Coastal Commission It's been a staff effort at this point and last November. I received the red-lined edits from the Coastal Commission staff And that's where we stand today Do we stop for a second someone has a radio or? Okay, I'm sorry so At this point that we haven't submitted to the Coastal Commission, but just at a staff level We received all of their red lines in November five different staff members reviewed this at all different levels so it is Pretty strongly vetted through with their comments And they wanted they had five different staff members review this so that we wouldn't be learning anything new when we Hopefully submit to the Coastal Commission So we are at the final step of Coastal Commission certification Your local Coastal Program is your the Coastal Program in which the Capitola adopts and so that we can regulate the Oversee the regulations along our coast within the Coastal Zone It takes effect within our zoning code or part of our implementation plan Our zoning map is part of our implementation plan the zoning code and also Part of our land use plan is the general plan land use maps That will be updated as well when we get this certified with the Coastal Commission Currently the 2018 Zoning code is being applied outside the Coastal Zone So in mostly in our commercial areas until this is adopted by the Coastal Commission The we've been applying the 1975 zoning code So two-thirds of the city is within the Coastal Zone and it's still under the previous regulations When we updated our code we updated the entire code so we were not planning on submitting portions of the zoning code is a Full update in order to make it more user-friendly and bring bring in new planning Ideas and practices the as we've gone through this There's been some pretty significant changes happening at the Coastal Commission level in terms of sea level rise policy documents that have they've released and adopted that will have a Significant effects on how we treat our non conforming structures and also our structures within geological hazard sections Within our geological hazards overlay. So at this point, I am recommending and the Planning Commission also is Recommending the City Council that we submit those separately and it's actually partially the recommendation of the Coastal Commission staff and working through this They realize that their policy document is new. They've been working with the County of Santa Cruz on their geological hazards update They did not provide any edits to our geological hazards update They sent us edits that they had provided to Marin County and then for non conforming They Didn't realize the implications of making their else their Their updates to non conforming how far reaching our Coastal Zone is So they asked not to move forward with any of their edits for non conforming and really as a staff as staff I think it's It's the right Avenue to go down is to adopt 90% of the code all the hard work that's been put into this and give the These new rights to the property owners, but hold off on geological hazards and non conforming until We've had Substantial public outreach and have been able to work with the Coastal Commissioners and work closely with our residents on what's been What the impacts could be? So with that, I'll jump into the topics. There are eight different topics within the staff report The first is new Brighton Beach New Brighton Beach was added within the visitors serving overlays and as a city. We don't have Review of how high the development standards within new Brighton Beach for height open space different types of land uses so they had asked us to add visitors serving within for new Brighton and What from the Planning Commission, we were recommending that this go back to general under the visitors serving So that We're not implement. We're not putting in regulations that we can't require. This is similar to how schools are how we enforce schools so We did in our previous zoning code we did have Requirements for visitors for new Brighton and I believe some of those have carried over into our open space regulations so And we caught that was a recent comment that I received so within the open space There is a reference to campgrounds as an allowed use and within this update We should address that as well and take out any references to land uses so any questions regarding New Brighton and removing that as a specific overlay Next is the monarch coven Story So the next topic is the monarch coven I'm gonna talk about the current standard under what applies today and right now the monarch coven is a visitor serving use or visitor serving zone and for residential on this property residential is required That the use by the owners and their family members of up to one unit per parcel on the three parcels As long as a minimum of six guest bedrooms are available for visitor serving use within the three parcels So there are three parcels on the monarch Cove site there Can they're allowed to have up to three residential buildings one on each parcel as long and they can utilize them as a Residential use as long as there's a minimum of six guest bedrooms available for visitors serving So that's the current regulation when we updated the code The previous owning of visitors serving became an overlay and that's true throughout the whole zoning map When the base zone became single family the R1 zone, which is in line with the whole deep O'Hale neighborhood There was one footnote on the 2018 adopted code stating that single family dwellings are Required to have a conditional use permit for that site and that they have to comply with the development standards for single family residential Within the single family residential zoning district when we brought this to the coastal commission staff They came back with an added note saying that okay single family can apply to this site But it's allowed only if ancillary to a visitor accommodating use So that means that it has to be secondary to visitor accommodating on the site So they would still have to have some type of Accommodations in response to this when we brought it to Planning Commission the Planning Commission amended the note that single family dwellings rather than saying only Allowed only if ancillary to set allowed in conjunction with visitor accommodating you So it doesn't have to be secondary to it can be in conjunction with or a grant of a public public access to a viewpoint and That was added more as To provide another option Within our local coastal plan There is a map at the it's an exhibit B and Actually, it's not it's within the local coastal plan one of the maps and When discussing this property it identifies a viewpoint from the Monarch Cove in property. So The amendment to add or grant a public access to a viewpoint is in line with the local coastal program it was Almost it was in response to the request from the coastal commission saying we're willing to you know work with you With an either or so with that I am looking for direction on If there's support for the Planning Commission edit This evening or not and I thought we'd get direction on each item separately rather than me presenting all of the items And then coming back one by one So if you have any questions for me No, I defer to Thank you so First of all, how is this pre you mentioned this has been an ongoing project since 2014 It's gone out to the public this specifically since this has come back from the coastal Commission How has this been vetted through with the coastal Commission's recommendations? Has there been any opportunity for the community? to To comment or give feedback at this point. So there was Feedback received during our issues and options when we first went out It was one of this site was identified as one of the sites that we talked about back in 2014 2015 And it was decided at that point that we would move forward with the R1 With the visitor serving overlay and what that means is you can have a single-family use with all the other Uses incorporated for visitors serving so we went with that direction and then It it was reviewed the public could speak on it during all of our public hearings. There were definitely specific meetings in which we sent out postcards letting the neighbors know when the zoning map was being changed and it was specific to this to the site and Then after we received the coastal Commission edits and brought them to planning Commission and planning Commission Modified the red lines. We I sent out a notice again for this meeting to all the residents within Depot Hill Actually, I should give Linda credit for Making that happen, but so all the at this point the residents have been notified multiple times about this change And I think also to be clear Staff's proposal is it went to the council's comfortable with the changes that we would put it out again for public comment And then go through a public comment period and then bring it back to the council and decide what we actually submit to the coastal Commission So we've been through a deep process and we still have process in front of us Okay, well get to the public in a minute now Kristen You know, I'm I have some concerns about this particular issue because we've received about five Emails or letters and public comment in the last 24 hours, and I'm still trying to piece together What those how those comments fit into what we are trying to do here? And so I have some concern with really giving any Direction or putting this out to the public yet when Personally, I can only speak for myself, but when I personally I'm still trying to take what we've received in the last 24 hours and Match it up with that, you know, these all of these updates, but specifically with this issue So I personally have a little bit of concern in for in providing any direction on this particular issue moving forward When there's still a lot of questions and clearly a lot of concerns from the letters that we've received just in the last 24 hours That's where I stand on this right now Um, I personally agree with Kristen I'm going to be touring this next week with a neighbor and I'm hopefully going to reach out to other neighbors To get a personal idea of what people in the area feel I know that a lot of neighbors from what I remember of the earlier hearings would like to see this as our one That's my sense, but I'd like to revisit that and get a more in-depth feeling from the neighbors itself Yes, I'm just giving my comments And so in a sense, I'd like to put this out before there's more input and then make that decision And at this point, I'd like to have people from the audience to have their say So I'd open up to people in the audience on this particular question Please come forward and identify yourself if you'd like for the record I'm Lana Balajit, and this is my husband Robert And maybe we should call you Bob. Sorry It's okay, and we are the owners of monarch coven and and We are here this evening to give you a much clearer picture of What this is about and what we've gone through Since the Coastal Commission decided that our property That has been in Bob's family for 58 years Was deemed visitor-serving only We could no longer have the right to use our property as a residence as it had been and It was devastating to both us our children our grandchildren Because that wasn't in our plan And so I wrote to a letter today. I don't know if you'd received it But if you wouldn't mind because I'm not a good public speaker I would like to go through this with you so that you have a better understanding of Who we are and what we're asking for My husband was 18 years old when his family purchased the El Salto property in Capitola That property became a long-lasting and beloved home for himself and our family It has been in that family for 58 years. We're getting older It has much history from before that time and much history since then It has experienced many changes and downsizing including use Historically the R1 visitor-serving zoning this was in place until 2005 When the California Coastal Commission decided That this long standing zoning needed to be changed on the Monarch coven The half of the property to our half To visitor-serving without an R1 zoning choice This action eliminated access to our historical use of private residence That we'd previously enjoyed for many years It should be noted that the other half of the property, which is right next door and Was part of the original El Salto's property Received the dual zoning of VS slash R1 so they gave it to them and They eliminated us and that remains to this day Monarch coven is a small 11 room and that is located at the very end of a residential neighborhood It makes it very difficult for us because we have neighbors that care about where they live To do any kind of business to grow to do anything It's primary source of income is that of a bed and breakfast It makes very little money in comparison to larger venues and the upkeep on this older large property Requires continual care and maintenance It is truly a labor of love that we continually Self-fund my husband and I are both in our 70s and Not always in the best of health We intend to retire shortly with no plans to keep the end open as a business a business that is not self-supporting and difficult to maintain the city of Capitola and Our neighbors on Depot Hill Support this change back to VS slash R1 with the new zoning Historically our neighbors have expressed that they will not support any kind of expansion or growth at Monarch Cove as It impedes their privilege of residential use. It's a neighborhood. It's not a commercial zone Our streets are narrow. They do not support additional traffic and the neighbors all agree that it is a quiet serene place and We'll be disturbed by additional traffic flow to any Monarch Cove in Future visitor serving developments We have our hands tied. We can't do anything We are approaching the end of our lives and wish to put this zoning issue back in order for ourselves and for our children We don't want to leave them with any underdeveloped property That is zoned solely visitor serving that isn't self-supporting and One that they cannot use as a residence to live on We ask your support of returning our privilege to live in the house and on the property we've owned for 58 years Give us back This opportunity to live in our family home that we love here in Capitola And then provide our children with the same privilege, which is every parent's wish We would like to ask the Coastal Commission one question What is the reasoning by the decision to implement a zoning amendment which is unclear? Ambiguous with regards to visitor serving use it clearly should be simplified By reverting back to a simple vs. Slash R1 zoning Residential use should not be made ancillary To a private property to visitor serving use The Coastal Commission states that it doesn't support taking the option of visitor serving away from the public and Thus access to the coast including the view of the ocean as we all know There are multiple areas of Capitola that have public view points But they're not on private property Including many and I mean many along Depot Hill You could just walk down the street and you've got a beautiful ocean view. Okay, please wrap it up. Okay the public access adjacent to Monarch Cove Along the abandoned Escalona slash old Grand Avenue That section is 50 feet wide and it ends up right at the edge of the cliff for a spectacular public Ocean viewpoint. Thank you very much. All right TJ your next oh excuse me That was DJ Good evening. My name is Adam Samuels. I live in Depot Hill. Nice to see many of you and to see some of you for the first time Thanks for your service. Um a couple logistics Thank you for the notice. I don't think it was a required thing, but it was really great to receive To Councilwoman Peterson's comment about late responses When I got the notice I went online it there was a one-page talking about the meeting it referred to some notes But they weren't available. I was able to first look at the excerpt relative to this in the agenda that came out on Monday So there was just a little bit of administrative stuff I think perhaps for that and the more detailed report I couldn't find until I actually asked Somebody involved with the city and they pointed me out to the actual report So I think that might be why things were backed up because we couldn't have access as the public Secondly, I just thank you to the budgets I you know, we have had a long relationship since I've been in the neighbor almost 12 years just trying to sort this out And I really feel that at least for myself We've aligned in terms of what we want as a neighborhood that we now have an alignment on that Residentials by the right solution is great and thanks to the council and the planning commissioners for really, you know this proposal because I doubt That the coastal commission has been on the property I doubt they've been in the neighborhood in a long time And I would ask if we're going to submit something to these guys And if they care to make this kind of choice for the community that they put their boots on the ground I Think otherwise, it's really whimsical You know if you're there, it's pretty apparent what could work And if you you were to try to be respectful of the neighborhood in the community I don't think it's an unreasonable request I Differ to the wording of this because you know, I think Personally, I've worked with many of them this for a long time and I know you all are doing the best for the city and for the solution So I think just the last thing is thank you, you know, thanks for listening Thanks for everything you're doing to make what I think is the best possible solution long-term for the neighborhood for the community and the city Thanks Good evening mayor and council members TJ Welch and I am one of your planning commissioners, but I'm really here on behalf of Just being a resident and having some concerns about the process and I appreciate Kristen that you Asked a little bit for more time. So I've been Trying to get my arms around the coastal commission and how it's going to impact Capitola for some time now and I've I have Many many hours Way many hours There's a lot of hours involved in and you each received a blue binder I believe with that the edits and you could probably see for yourselves. It gets pretty technical And some of it is it can be a little bit overwhelming Especially when you have the state agency the coastal commission Breathing down our necks tell us that you know, they will they're editing They're telling us about setbacks and the joy that are in the cliff with heights that you know from a One standpoint you wonder why do they even have a say about this when it's not really on the ocean itself? But more specifically tonight. We're talking about monarch coven I Have some strong concerns about the coastal commission trying to Impose on private property this public view shed And so we've had some debate about it on the in the planning commission and Katie represented that that we Kind of came up to an agreement of having a common viewpoint, but in talking with the bludges and but thank you very much I know they've been a little bit under the weather, so I'm glad they came tonight There if you look at that right behind the yellow arcing line there of their property There's a little brown area. That's the road that Is? Escalona Drive to some extent now. I don't know I've asked I don't know who owns the property I think part of it may be the cities and I think the bludges are open to That being a viewpoint, but for the planning or the coastal commission to try to impose this Public access on private property when they want to enjoy their house. I don't think any of you I know I wouldn't want John Doe pulling up next to me in my backyard while I'm trying to enjoy the Sun out Laying out in the Sun and nobody would want to see that anyway, so I think we we really need to be careful about how the coastal commission tries to impose these and and when you really look Technically, I honestly don't believe they I think it's called a taking and they're they're legal terms in the process and our LCP are past the current LCP that we're using and There's wisdom in this room because I know there's some people who are very involved in that It's a little confusing about this little arrow view shed I think it's on the next slide that Katie had there that shows because if you look at the map it shows Where that view is it's actually not on our view shed map This is on the access a coastal access map Which is a little bit confusing because there is no access to the coast there So it's not on the view shed map, but if you look where that's at It's really located more towards Sacramento Avenue because that whole area used to be part of El Salta So That whole process is a little confusing if we are going to move forward with this at some point and have a Actual viewpoint I would ask that we put it on the Escalona end of Escalona and and Respect the rights of the property owners to have private property and then I'd also just hope that you Give us some time to work through this and and many of the cities have been working I've been working this from four or five even up to 12 years and some people never adopted an LCP just because of The conflict so I would I would just ask that we take our time to this process It's not anything that has to be done today And and I know we feel like we have to get this zoning code done and nobody would like to see that in well Maybe Katie any more than I do have having worked on it So I just ask that we take our time and get plenty of public comment in the process. Thank you TJ Welcome So I'm Mike Morrissey mr. Mayor council members, I sent you a letter yesterday That I think is really the intent was to introduce myself and my wife We are new residents here. We bought the property at at 106 Sacramento About a year and a half ago. We've been working with Katie and her team to Effect the remodel coastal got involved in that process. I think my my goal tonight is to really sort of dialogue with the city and Really share at a high level some of my concerns some of our concerns about the process That is ongoing in Capitola, but generically across the entire state by coastal There's I'm very inspired by the blodges story. I have not met them yet personally, but I've certainly heard about some of the issues I read the the 348 page red line that was included for tonight's agenda I had legal counsel do that as well and that was some of the basis for the letter that we sent yesterday We're very concerned with what's happening in Capitola. What's happening across the state? by by the coastal staff in terms of them overstepping their bounds In terms of what they're legally entitled to do versus what they're actually doing and we had some of that Happened to us in terms of our our remodel planning process in terms of what the coastal process actually is versus what they chose to do to insert themselves very early in the process and you know when I when I was listening to the The story tonight from the blodgets that really rung home to me in terms of you know What they're enabled to do per the coastal act? and what the city of Capitola is Supposed to do really has the right to do based upon how that law is written So I'll I'll echo some of the things that TJ said I know I've only got another minute to go here But these are very complicated legal issues. I was I was Really blown away by the depth of editing that coastal had done In the draft that we are talking about tonight And the impact on on people will people and I think the blodgets have a really good example where Their rights are being severely threatened by coastal getting involved when they shouldn't right their job is to look at the the LCP when it's done and then simply Opined upon whether it conforms to the coastal act that was passed in 1976. That's what that's what the law is That's what their job is okay, so So I think there's a lot more discussion that we need to have and and certainly we're we're here We're gonna look forward to being Residents of Capitola and I'm looking forward to engaging with the staff and with the city council Individually and as a whole to help understand where this is going in the future. So thank you. Thank you very much Any other comments from the those attending? Okay, bring it back to city council For some action discussion, I do have some questions, okay So as you said right now, we're dealing with the coastal Commission staff and These edits are based on that interchange with the coastal Commission staff and how city planning has responded to those Okay So maybe read this is an issue for you also We're trying to work with the coastal Commission and We're trying to work with something that in a sense. We cannot put our hands completely on It's the staff at this point But we have to put something forward to the coastal Commission so they could make a ruling on What position does that put us in in terms of how we respond to the people in the city that want to make changes? If we put something in that is going to hold them back or allow them to go forward What kind of position does that put us in and what kind of position does that put in property owners for instance? Thank you, Mayor Bertrand It's a bit of a broad question, but I'll try and start wide and end up on more of a narrow thank you Because our concerns are basically the citizens of Capitola correct in the position of the city here in this regard So the you know, there is certainly a difference between the coastal Commission and the coastal staff and Staff are the for similar to how the city of Capitola operates They're the day-to-day implementers for the the will of the coastal Commission or the will of City Council Staff ought to be working within the confines in the directions of whoever the governing body is so in this instance Katie's been working very diligently to facilitate discussions and work with coastal staff to Develop what are ultimately supposed to be Modifications or edits that would ring true at the coastal Commission level Certainly property owners have routinely disagreed with staff's Perspective on what it's entitled to add or subtract from coding in many locations up and down the state It's not an uncommon experience by any stretch of the imagination with respect to where that place is the city It's a difficult position to be in The city needs to present something that it believes or the best practice would be to present something that will likely Be adopted or be certified by the coastal Commission In terms of representing your constituents I think you do have an obligation as you've noted to represent the citizen citizens of Capitola, maybe not Anybody else so to the extent that there are red line edits that are proposed by the coastal Commission that you may disagree with And you find there being a more compelling argument And be more protective of your own citizens interests to do something different You could certainly put that forward you can direct Katie on the items that you find to be high-profile or highly concerning And you can you know look at lower-level issues with maybe less of a scrutiny But ultimately if you identify something like this as a sensitive topic for you and give Katie direction She can spearhead an effort with their staff to maybe come to a resolution that doesn't result at logger heads between members of the public and You know members of this governing body with the coastal Commission or with the coastal staff So you have the right to present to the coastal Commission almost anything you please Pragmatically working with coastal staff is how you get to a product that's likely to be adopted or certified by the coastal Commission And that's a delicate dance that involves relationship management and pragmatic give and take Certainly everyone has boundaries to what they're legally permitted to do or ask for and if they exceed those boundaries It's absolutely within the discretion of the city to say no But ultimately that's coming from a Perspective of counsel. What is the line that you're not willing to cross? What are some things that you find intolerable as a potential overreach? So if we're going to come back and have further discussions on this one of the things I can do is work with Katie with of course counsel direction if you identify areas where you find concerning or Specifically sensitive topics we can approach those together And come out with maybe a different type of language that is both protective of private property rights Which is something that you're expressing an interest in preserving as well as giving coastal Commission and the coastal staff an opportunity to provide Necessary comments that would carry forward the policies of the Coastal Act. Okay. I I would like to have That kind of exchange with the Coastal Commission staff Crystallize the issues that we have here in terms of property rights and as expressed by the blotches that they would like to move away from Providing a visitor serving Bed and breakfast because this is no longer feasible for them. I am compelled by that personally But I don't want to get it loggerheads with the Coastal Commission, which has many deeper pockets than we do So if we could crystallize something that is compelling in terms of the individuals here that we're talking about and I know the city planning came up with the option of a viewer's Location I want to know if that is something that's actually feasible Some of the letters suggest this is sort of walking away from our duties And so that's the other side of the issue, you know, are we actually? rescinding Our position to protect the public's options Katie, please if I may during the first planning Commission special hearing on this we had Kevin Kahn from the Coastal Commission staff at our meeting and in response to many of the when we were working through edits and the Planning Commission would ask Would you accept this edit? he every time that question was asked he would say well, I'm not the Board that would you know make the final decision on this so I don't have an answer for you So as much as you know, we could definitely take another Run through with their staff, but at some point you can also say we don't want to accept this red line And we could submit to the Coastal Commission without the red line leave it as it was adopted and See if the Coastal Commission itself has the same concerns as the staff Okay, so just to say there are How does that process take because there are property owners involved here and they may be wanting to make decisions Or is that an unknown? so The process can vary they can ask for additional time, but from the time they receive the LCP amendment I don't want to misspeak. I believe it's nine months. I mean three months. Do you well? Sorry, I'm unprepared for As it was nine years ago I think the last time I submitted an LCP amendment as a community development director It was three months that they had to process it and then they could ask for a one-year extension And with something like this historically depending on the workload in the Santa Cruz office I would anticipate that they would usually get it in front of their Commission nine months a year after submission I have one other question What precedent is the? Coastal Commission staff operating under I mean are these individual opinions or is there enough precedent? There must have been other instances across the state of California That have come up in regards to something similar, so I'm wondering are there precedents things that they should be operating under They have staff that's been there for a long period of time such as Susan Craig And so I believe they're working off of a lot of precedents as well as the continuity I Would also know of note sort of of interest directly related to this side is that the city's original submission and it's 1990 LCP Was that our last LCP I? Think it was about 1990 was the last time the LCP was adopted the language about the Three You know someone needs to live on one of the three parcels as long as there are six bedrooms available That came from the Coastal Commission that was part of their sort of what they Inserted back into our so this is a precedent from back then. Yeah, so in terms of precedent The city already had a tangle and there may be even people in the room who know the story behind that But when we look back, I remember we saw this that this actually was a red line that came back from Coastal Okay Any other comments? Yeah, I I do So I appreciate everyone coming and speaking today. I absolutely Support The the homeowners the homeowners and where they stand on this what I'm concerned about is The strategy of the overall submission of of this and that we're going to be submitting Some different opinions possibly submitting some different opinions from the Coastal Commission versus the Planning Commission and so strategically What would be in our best efforts or best? What would be best for us in looking at this and submitting this overall especially missing those two elements? And so that's kind of where I am I'm at a standstill because the Planning Commission came forward with some great recommendations Coastal Commission has their own you staff have their own and I'm just I'm just wondering about What that would look like for us overall? Well once we actually submit to the I think at this point you want to move forward with the Recommendation that you think is best for the city so and best for its residents So that's not a piece milled So it's not piece mailed and that you know the overall document is there are two chapters that would not be submitted But the old chapters would still be in effect. So we still would have a non-conforming chapter We would renumber it so it fits within the document We would still have a geological hazards chapter renumbered to fit within the document So any anyone from the public coming in to look at our documents it's gonna flow It'll be user-friendly it just won't be the updated version that we put time into for those two chapters But otherwise in this process for updating to get to Coastal Commission to review this You don't need to accept all of these red lines at this point and strategically if if you choose that there are some that you don't want to accept you can leave them out and We'll be getting read you know if they don't Certify the document will be they'll be asking us to make modifications and you'll see it again So there'll be another time to negotiate so for the really hard points that you don't feel right about getting certified You can leave those out at this juncture and if they come back and request them We can put them in at that time you do however want to submit as many that you think do work with the city because to show them that they've been heard and that We're our Update is in line with our LCP Just wanted to jump in just for process What what this looks like is before you you have some red line changes You take what you do like and what you don't like you send it all along It's presented ultimately by coastal staff to the Coastal Commission at a hearing kind of like this one And the coastal staff if they think that the red line changes were that they made Were necessary and if the city didn't include them that the Coastal Act requires they be included They would make that pitch to the Coastal Commission if the Coastal Commission accepted that the Coastal Staff's Advocacy they may approve The zoning ordinance with certain red line changes and only if the city then agrees to them would have become effective So the city has an opportunity if it disagrees with these red lines or any red lines To go to Coastal Commission at that hearing and to advocate directly to the Coastal Commission Now certainly Coastal Commission receives a report and a recommendation from its staff the same way that you receive recommendations from your staff and Depending on how your relationships are with staff sometimes those recommendations are easily ignored or other times It's impossible to ignore them, but ultimately if there's a significant point of discrepancy like this one that discrepancy can be aired out in front of the Coastal Commission if Between negotiations with Coastal Staff and City Staff We're not able to reach a resolution that's satisfactory to the council members to the public, etc But ultimately if you feel that red lines are proposed that are You know not appropriate because they trample on your citizens rights as we've heard them characterized Then you could say we're not going to propose those to the Coastal Commission And when we go up to the Coastal Commission or when Katie goes up to the Coastal Commission She can articulate to them why those red lines were not accepted by the city and what the concerns were and how the Coastal Act doesn't require them Coastal staff will give their presentation and the Coastal Commission will take a vote on it So there's future debates to be had about the content of any red lines if you don't take them today Does that make sense? Yeah, thank you for explaining the process. I have one more question to circle back to the actual topic so granted What are you what were the thoughts behind looking at? long-term The the long-term plan for the property so granted if it goes back to VSR 1 What what could that look like for that property and have we thought about the impact to the rest of the community and You and you know, this is hypothetical, you know, and so those are the pieces. I feel like I'm missing If they have or have not been addressed so if they're it was torn down in a giant House was built in a block, you know, all of those types of things have those Have has that been talked about? So we haven't done a an overall build out for this site to talk about what could be done But I can tell you that under the R1 district a lot lot minimum size is 5,000 square feet. So a substantial Substantially if they decided to tear down all of the homes on this site, it could be redeveloped and there would be a considerable amount of More Lots on the site Subdivided are under the R1. So that is something to consider within the the new, you know, how the new code is Drafted But that would go to planning Commission for review it would go to planning Commission for me excuse me Yeah, it'd be a subdivision application so From my understanding from what I just heard even if we decided that we only wanted some of these red lines that we were going to Accept right it it would still go to public comment as is correct No, it would only go to public comment with what we had approved or it wouldn't go to public comment at all It so after this step, we would take all of your recommended Changes and update the document and then put it out for a public review For 45 days and then we would go back through the process of bringing your Changes, we would notice put out all the notice and that needs to be redone And it will go back to the planning Commission for final recommendation and then adoption by the city council Personally, yeah personally, I still feel concerned and moving forward with even Approving some of the red lines or or not. I feel like that as mentioned this gets really technical We've received some last-minute comments last-minute letters And of course as mentioned, I don't have a problem with the fact they came in last minute I have personal concerns with being able to ensure that I understand and Can apply that to this in a way that allows my Decision to be well-informed and so you know even at the risk of Sounding ignorant, I don't feel comfortable in moving forward in providing direction or Sending this out to public comment if I don't feel confident that the decision that I'm making is Fully informed Personally and well constructed So I personally would prefer that this section this discussion topic Be continued to a future meeting so that there's more time to consider The information we've been given in the letters the information that we've just been given from public comment And that would be that would be my preference is that your motion I will motion yeah to continue this to a future meeting and I won't be at the next one So I would prefer either the first or second meeting in May So we have a motion. Yeah, if I may add Out of respect for everyone's time and all of the efforts that were made I mean years years and years have been set before me and As a new councilwoman coming on board to learn about this I've spent many hours lots of notes lots of questions and I want to be respectful of Of those that are are those who are emailing those who are asking me questions and to make an educated Decision in front tonight just doesn't seem Doesn't seem right to me It has no reflection on what's being presented. It's about making Making the right The the right column some of these red lines and I know that our my planning commissioners knew as well Who's gone through who's gone through some of us with me and it's just a matter of? understanding What's in front of me so not even just this item? I I don't feel comfortable moving or with with the entire With the tire gender item. Yeah, okay, so the motion hasn't been seconded, but I would like to make a comment I am respectful of the fact that you are a new City council person and I was in the same position believe me One other people on the city council said hey was whoa a bit that was appreciated So I'm glad you said that because it's a reality if we're going to be good city council people We have to be ready to address the issue as you put forth also um, I Can't make a motion, but is there a second to your motion? May I ask for legal? If that's if that's if that's appropriate that we would be Tabling the entire item or are we tabling the this particular sex discussion item to what what's on the table? Yeah, my recommendation would be to take these items one at a time I think we have another council member who will join the conversation as we get to the other issue areas and You know we moved to the first issue area. I think relatively smoothly And so I would take action on this item would be my suggestion Yeah, her her motion is just on this particular item, and I totally agree that we should go item by item But also in regards to what you said, maybe we should set a time limit You're not gonna be here at the next one Ed will be here at the next one, okay? So um, if you want to vote on that one we have to wait a month, but if you don't We could actually we could we could give a certain period of time. That's what I'm sort of suggesting Yeah, no, I want to be a part of the discussion in the eventual vote I don't want to postpone it to learn more about it just to not be involved got it when it comes down to the final decision. I definitely want to be Involved in the final decision on it Okay, and I just want to backtrack just momentarily because I feel like Council councilwoman Brooks brought up and I should also echo that it has nothing to do with what is presented to us and our staff Works incredibly hard on this and so I know that it's not always easy that I'm up here saying thank you for all your hard work We're not going to do anything with it right now So I apologize for that, but I do think I would like to be a part of that that decision in the future So the motion hasn't been seconded. I just want to ask if there could be an amendment to that Can you say we'll put this off for a month? And I'm going to propose that if there are items that we come up to that we can't make a decision tonight We adopt the same format that during the next month we Consider that item and have interchanged with staff and interchange with the public on it so that we're better informed I'm making a decision on that item Okay, and then at that point it will be well, I'll be back next time But within a month, I think that should give us enough time to to go over these items. Yeah I would I would accept that amendment to the motion. Okay, would you second or do you feel not I? We can call the vote. Yeah I'm sorry you can't I can't say Okay, so there's been a motion in second and let's repeat city clerk, please repeat the motion The motion I believe it is to You want to do it to one month? to Yeah, to the new discussion of the Monarch Cove revisions to the May 9th meeting. Yes, okay So it's been second motion All those in favor aye. Okay passes so I like to propose for the rest of the City Council that if we come up with an item that we Need more time and I'm fully supportive of that And we recognize that this is going to put staff's timetable off a little bit But in the purposes of our duty to the City of Capitola, we have to do that so the Items that come up that we need more time on we will take to the next what May 9th right meeting Okay Okay, please continue Okay, so on to the next Esha topic three so and I just want to backtrack for a minute So there is absolutely no rush to get through the Coastal Commission edits and we can take as much time as the council needs I thought I would highlight in this in the staff report just the major changes that took place I'm hoping to receive comments from each of you of items that you would like me to bring back at a future meeting And I'm also available for if there are little questions that you have to reach out to me And we'll sit down and go through any technical items that just aren't clear So no rush and this evening any items that you don't feel prepared to move forward with we can easily Continue them out to that here. I'm sorry to mischaracterize it, but I have to agree every time you're available You're just wonderful. So I know that this is what you're going to be doing with all five of us Thank you. So next we'll move on to Esha. This is the environmentally sensitive hazard I'm sorry the Habitat areas areas and We worked that I think the Esha chapter has come a long way from the prior draft We've gotten a little more specificity of Esha's your environmentally sensitive habitat areas and Within the regulations There's better standards to know when a biological study is required where the Where the Esha areas are we went we hired a biologist during this process to look at our Previous map and as you can see in this map on the slide the light green area was previously within our Esha boundary And we've condensed it down to the dark green areas in which there is actual habitat And we've divided up the areas specific to the different Esha overlays The coastal Commission we brought this to them. They said let's remove the beaches. They're not Sensitive habitat areas. So we'll be removing the beaches from this map and in Some of the other changes that took place under the land use plan There's a standard in there that the setback from the Soquel Creek riparian corridor Originally in the zoning code. It was at 35 feet under the land use plan for the coastal LCP it's identified at 25 feet and the coastal Commission was supportive of moving that back down to 25 feet It seems the 35 foot will make many of the homes along the creek Nonconforming and by decreasing that setback. There'll be there's more opportunities for more of the homes to comply with the setback requirement and as we move into nonconforming Issues when you know after this step in the revision of the LCP it'll it'll be helpful to have more homes that are complying along the river They we've also built in a waiver of a biological study so typically if you're within a parcel with Esha you're required to do a biological study and then from the The Esha boundary of where the habitat area is identified. That's where your setback standard begins and for we built in a Waiver for those scenarios when there's definitely a development that's not going to impact the habitat area that we can wave the Biological study and previously we didn't have that so on a home if there was an addition off the front that was on a parking area We could now wave that Requirement so really that's within Esha Improvements I would however like our city attorney to review this section and make sure that there is nothing that is outside overreaching By the Coastal Commission and their staff edits so that would be my recommendation tonight would be for the Esha section that would be reviewed by the For a very close review by our legal Our city attorney do we need a motion on that? Can I get clarification? Yeah, does that recommendation? Does that suggestion mean that you would recommend that we wait another month as we did in the last while there's review on okay? So so I think if Reed comes up with any items that should that he's concerned about we would then bring that back to the city council Any comments from the public guess Nils This is kind of a strange format for public comments Tonight, so I wanted to my comments are actually a little more general But I wanted to make them when all four council members were in the room And I also wanted to make them sometime before 10 30 or 11 o'clock when everybody's tired. Sorry, okay This is pretty my name is Nils Westman. This is This document right here is the recently released California Coastal Commission sea level rise policy guidance Chapter 7 dated November 7th 2018. Hopefully you are all already familiar with it Frankly, it scares the crap out of me. It contains the Coastal Commission centerpiece policy of managed retreat depending on how the Commission's Implements this policy this could have immediate and devastating impacts on residents of Capitola village along sail so Cal Creek and on Capitola's bluffs These impacts could include an immediate drop in property values and lenders refusing to loan on those properties as well As residents no longer being able to significantly improve their properties in the longer term The ever-present fear that the next storm earthquake or fire means the end of your capitol a dream and your secure financial future and Just as importantly a major disaster could spell the end of historic and quaint Capitola that we all love Okay, can I read the future? Do I know what the Coastal Commission is ultimately going to do? No, of course not and frankly neither you But I do know Unfortunately that disaster will strike Capitola at some point be it a major earthquake Including a devastating village fire a la 1906 a Log jam behind the Stockton Street Bridge Diverting the Creek onto Riverview Avenue and through the village a huge Alaskan swell destroying the Esplanade businesses and yes Even sea level rise What do what I do know is that what happens with the LCP? We'll decide whether we can rebuild and carry on or be told to pack our bags and get the hell out the stakes are huge and You have the responsibility to make these key decisions On behalf of all capital capital residents that responsibility your responsibility is Inescapable It is on you so I would urge you to do two things first hire an attorney or a firm who is best is the best possible expert on Dealing with the Coastal Commission and with their policy of managed retreat and do it soon because I am sure Coastal Committees Cities all up and down the state are Scooping them up left and right do not Sorry to say this do not depend on your city attorney to advise and guide you through this minefield They have already demonstrated their inability to successfully shepherd a process and straightforward as a neighborhood skate park Secondly slow down and delay the deal making with the Coastal Commission as long as you can so that the legal and political aspects of Managed retreat can play out more clearly statewide Do not run the risk of being an early adopter Lest the Coastal Commission decide to make an example out of little Capitola Find out from an expert whether adopting the more benign sections of the LCP and then starting Negotiations on the radical stuff is a smart move or a mistake Slow down and get expert legal advice going up against the Coastal Commission is the classic David and Goliath story I fear it will not work out for Capitola and its impacted residents as well as it worked out for David. Thank you Mr. Westman, thank you for your advice so current This is the brother sister act. Oh, I did not know And Nelson I both own property on the river and I also own property in the village so this is a really serious concern to us and I've been involved now where I currently live on 37th with a Situation with the Coastal Commission where our entire neighborhood went before the Coastal Commission to talk about a project that was was brought before them and honestly We traveled to where the Coastal Commission was meeting they made their staff Not one Coastal Commissioner even looked up from their iPads To make any kind of eye contact when the when citizens were making their presentation So don't think for a second that they care about what goes on with the people who live in the area that they are Overseeing because I don't believe that they really do I think they I don't know whether they rubber stamp what what the staff says So I just agree completely that caution is the number one here And I really am heartened by the fact that I'm hearing the same thing from from you all and and from the staff too So I don't I feel like you're hearing us that you know take take the time that's necessary and Just look at the whole thing because there's you know, there's village things There's a lot of stuff that's really not really I don't I don't know that everybody feels really comfortable with so I hope that tonight really that's my I would be most satisfied with nothing being improved and Everything being, you know continued for more exploration. Thank you Thank you again Any other comments from those attending? Can bring it back to City Council? I think we can continue the recommendation is to put off the ESA until next time after we have some Ruminations or opinions from our legal staff, okay Noted the comments from the public. I think that is something we probably should continue to think about Please continue with the presentation. Do we need a motion on that? No, that that's staff recommendation in this case. That was a good question. Yes So this next one is pretty technical and it's the village parking We've worked hard on this in the past week and kind of come up with an idea to make this Easier for the general public and I would suggest I bring this one back and and put it actually our I can go through it Where we're headed but I Can present it to you and then I think you can really dive into the details and I'll make sure to include this all in the next staff report, but This one's technical. So two seconds I'll do a an overview for you. Okay. No reviews fine. Thank you. I have a quick question. This is village parking Do I need to recuse myself? You do not? Okay. Thank you It's the next one is the hotel. Okay, so village parking so the 1975 code and it this lines up with the local coastal plan says that For village parking provided parking has to be on sites outside the village, but within walking distance Or at a remote site that served by a shuttle system There is exceptions included which can be approved by the Planning Commission and those are for non-historic structures and residential overlays the capital of theater site and the mercantile site and the Code is specific about minimizing driveway cuts ground floor and Allowing for ground floor street frontage commercial development and that parking areas and structures on the should be in the interior of the site And then it also relates to the FEMA regulations when we went through this for the zoning code update It's it's pretty confusing how it's written The non-historic structures and residential overlays was cut out of the update for 2018 adopted code so it was still to provide Parking on sites outside of the village the exceptions that were included were for the capital of theater site in the mercantile and Again driveway cuts should be minimized and the parking area should be located on the interior of the site and then also the FEMA requirement When this went to the Coastal Commission, they elaborated on it quite a bit They brought back in the non-historic structures and residential overlays It didn't seem like it was not a focus during the conversations on that. It was just well. It's in the LCP Should consider why it's being removed or remedy it because there was no Changes or backing that up and then for the capital of theater site They added a lot more regulations about limited on-site parking to serve ADA guests and valet We're similar shuttle system however off-site parking is strongly encouraged to the maximum extent possible and then again talking about driveway cuts and The area in which the parking should occur and then they kept the mercantile requirements and FEMA I want to call to your attention at the top of the standard the standard is related to the location of parking The Coastal Commission staff really took this to the next level to add a whole lot more regulations to where we were simply just trying to Direct where parking should be located on a site So taking a step back I want to look at what the overall purpose of this is and it's really to create great streets and in our little village When you're walking around and headed down to the beach You want a safe street in which you can get to the beach or get to a restaurant and you don't want a street that You're looking both ways looking for cars that are coming in and out of driveways It really when you're creating a great downtown you typically don't have that many driveway cuts And people feel comfortable and they're enjoying the outside public realm As it's a different experience than your typical walk down the street. It's really a comforting place in which it has a lot of character and a sense of place so This is Just an image of a street that you know, it doesn't have Many interruptions and the pedestrians look like they feel safe as you can see there's some type of parade coming down the street And we're fortunate to have this right here in our village and some of our streets are a little bit have This is one of the strength our strongest points is right along capitol avenue where there's minimal Driveway cuts and a lot of there's been alleyways off of San Jose Avenue in the back and there's parking opportunities and redevelopment has occurred but in the appropriate places parking has been placed so in looking at these in in what the purpose of this section of code is and breaking it down I went back to the lcp and the original regulations And it's really stating that there are certain areas residential areas in which parking can be allowed And that would be along cliff avenue The riverview avenue residential area and cherry avenue residential And in those cases where there's a historic home and Parking doesn't fit on the site. Then it possibly may need to be placed on a different site Requiring that that off-site space be outside the village is I think that should be taken out of the code this past week planning commission reviewed A project that was along capitol avenue that if we hadn't said that the parking had to be outside of the village They could have placed it on another property within walking distance. That was actually in the village so Um And the other modification in this would be to keep the mercantile in theater sites utilize the Same language that we originally had to minimize driveway cuts Make sure that the parking is central to the site and not along the street frontage. It should be Place behind the building. We have actually more Design guidelines incorporated into the central village district when you read through that chapter about where the parking Should be placed behind the buildings, but also Adding a standard for properties that are fronting the commercial core. I think we should add a map in this section to identify where that Commercial core is and it's shown in white on this map And stating that within the for properties fronting the commercial core on-site parking is allowed If access to parking is from a side street alleyway or existing driveway cut New driveway cuts are prohibited along the frontage of the commercial core So really strengthening that language and making sure we're protecting That experience within the village And here I've just highlighted what I just went over in that so just Making new standards for property fronting the commercial core Also maintaining the original standards that were in our old code for the capitol of theater site and mercantile And then really specifying that in those residential overlays they may have on-site parking And then of course the FEMA standards And then we would keep the Be that the planning commission may permit off-site parking If the spaces are within and better defining the walkable area to a quarter mile A quarter mile of the use in which it serves or located at a remote site served by a shuttle system And this keeps open the availability for we have an in-loop policy That can continue to be applied to have a remote shuttle system and All of that so that this will be included in the next staff report. So you can really look at it if you have any immediate concerns or Questions i'm happy to Answer those but I think it'll I'll make it easy to digest in the staff report Any questions of staff here Um, I had a A question so um In some earlier discussions with you the idea of parking off the valleys and And there's been some new developments in town since I've been here anyway where uh, that's been facilitated maybe some of the um options available to property owners would be To relax some issues in terms of separation and offsets from boundaries and stuff like that So that this could be augmented. That's all I'm just thinking about it from that. In other words come up with, um Planning options so that Owners of property would like to take advantage of the fact that will allow for alley parking And make that a benefit that they could get things out of that if they provide that that's all i'm thinking I don't know if that's a possibility, but I'll highlight. There's only Four lots in the village that You know aren't the mercantile earth theater site the four in red are One is the vacant lot on Capital avenue that a home was just approved for so that will no longer be a vacant lot and then the other three are Parking lots that could be developed in the future one being the david lang building The corner already has a driveway cut along the commercial core and then the other two are Accessed by side streets. So any of the existing buildings are allowed to do up to a 10% addition To redevelop and do a 10% addition without triggering their Parking requirement on site so they there is an incentive in there to keep your Keep current although it's minimal because of our parking issue So this is just a dub update so if there aren't any questions next item Any other questions I think if there's any feedback, I mean this is a new idea and I understand that we were just hitting you with it But if if there's any feedback about this trajectory, I'll certainly would appreciate it Otherwise, we'll just continue along to the next meeting Well, if I may and before maybe you leave christin I just an overview about you know the process that we're going through and we certainly shouldn't be I think proving Anything this evening and certainly not in a piecemeal fashion But I just I would like for this matter to be continued Until the May 9th meeting I would like to have An analysis from staff About One, you know, we got a letter from mr. and mrs. Morisset concerning Specific areas citing pacific regulations and where the coastal commission staff had overstepped their authority And I would like the response to those To come back staff's view about whether that's accurate and And in addition whether there were any other areas Where that's a similar situation So that we have some basis for determining You know where we stand in terms of coastal regulations So I would like to see that come back At a future meeting There's also there were red line comments concerning accessory dwelling units And parking related to accessory dwelling units and they also seem to be in conflict with The state regulations concerning accessory dwelling units or I won't say in conflict, but they seem to go above and beyond what the state was requiring And for example, no additional parking necessary under the state regulations is within a bus stop There's 15 minute transit times Whereas the coastal mission just struck that completely and said no additional park off-street parking required if there's any transit nearby So that's an example and so I would like to have you know an analysis about that And how those two state regulations Interplay with one another Um, I would also the recognition made Concerning looking at maybe hiring a specialist Firm to help us You know with this Interaction as we move forward. I think it is going to be important for us to get good advice And I don't want to you know discount our current city attorney, but I would like to see your A response back about that recommendation and maybe some sense of what that would cost And And Also, I mean just when this is structured. I mean since we have two council members That have conflicts. I would like to maybe see each section maybe more focused and and completed So it's not really bleeding in To one another. I think that we need to be very careful about whatever it is that we do With this particular agenda item So, I mean those are those were my recommendations. I submit council members have any other overarching direction for staff that they would like to see You know brought back Then I would but I would like to propose that as as a motion or Our direction to staff And a motion to continue this item into the may 9th meeting Okay, um, she was just giving an overview. So this is not a complete presentation So I didn't think there was a motion required on this. Is that correct or not? Well, I mean the motion to continue at Um, and I was just hoping to be able to do that while christin was still in the room um, so And and have this kind of overarching discussion of where we're going with this and instead of looking at each one of these and kind of a piece who went away So so are you uh for clarification? Are you recommending that we bring back just this discussion within this agenda item? No, there's a whole agenda item. No, I think that we need Well, because we haven't acted on any of it this evening. I don't know that we should Um, or can we also ed's not here in the room. We should do this when he's back Um, so I think we need to take the entire agenda item Um, I'm not hearing that there's any particular Timers constraints in doing that and taking the time to be thoughtful about this So the whole agenda item have it brought back But you know, and I have the particular questions that I posed I would like to have staff review and and give us, you know, their analysis of it Okay, I have another question on that. Sorry. Just clarification. No, that's okay. Please So I um I understand your concerns. Councilwoman Brooks had brought up the same possibility Of continuing the whole item. Is it is There a possibility or if the council decides to continue this whole agenda item Would we go forward with the rest of the discussions just as information items or would that end this conversation right now? I'm happy to continue Just giving you an overview because it may clarify a few things and I can quick like try to go through the slides pretty fast for you If that's what you'd like just an overview any you know, you're not You don't need to take action on anything this evening. So it's if and There's also quite a bit of information like accessory dwelling units. We updated the whole chapter based on this the new state regulations, so But I try so whatever you'd like to do we can sure well, that's why I was asking too Because I think the information would be good to have and and your clarification and the questions that we may have To ask on them But as previously suggested by two of the council members now that perhaps the whole item should be continued Was that a motion? Yes, you bet. Yeah, if I if I may add The the way we received the information too is was difficult to follow So what was sent out in the agenda in correlation with this And now in correlation with that is really hard to follow tonight and so I would second the motion of tabling the entire item so that we can take the time to to to correlate all of this and to make sure that things match up and really Figure out what we're voting on overall. So I would like to second that motion Okay, so there's been a motion in a second. So let's retract a little bit So we started this discussion with each item being brought up And then if we decide that we needed more information We were going to put it off to may 9th and that was a motion in second and we passed it So now that sam's come back because he was gone at that particular time We're basically saying Based on your motion that you would like a complete presentation of this particular total item of the zoning code And you're concurring you second it. So that's where we're at right now and Any more discussion on that Well, just to clarify that I mean I did there were specific requests that I would like to have staff focus on And particularly you're looking at Some of the issues raised in the letter from mr. Mrs. More say And as well as I would like to be informed if there are other areas that the planning commission maybe dealt with or Where maybe the coastal commission was overstepping their authority But you know that could mean it's not good for capitol. Some of these items may be appropriate But I think it would be good to know where those areas are and And and also as I said In and basically how this is how the item is structured in the future since We have two major conflicts here as well. So, okay So, um before we take a vote, I think the gist of this is we're sort of refocusing on just providing the basic information And some of the background issues with the coastal commission and as these issues developed in your conversation with staff And we've also been asking about legal issues, too So, um Does that sound about where we're at at this point? Is that what you would like to see Right and yeah Well, you're responding to some of the things that was brought to the dais and I agree with those too So, um Let's take a vote on this all those in favor of sam's motion all those in favor I agree, too so We will go forward with this item from the standpoint of presenting the staff report And we'll give ourselves. I think you said to may 9th, right? So we'll be giving ourselves this next couple A month excuse me weeks to prepare this And present it. Okay, so I think um There's difficulties in understanding some of the presentation and I share some of that And it's not because I haven't been involved in this but we're we're trying to Fool together a lot of different pieces of information in a complicated task And so we're going to take that Time necessary to make sure that we unravel that and make it less complicated so that we could you know address the major issues And um, I think you're going about that But maybe the initial effort was we're going to Approve certain things and then go on and maybe not approve certain things and then come back And so we're sort of changing course there Does that make sense? Do you want to yeah, it does. Do you want to receive the presentation on the remaining items this evening? Yes, yeah, okay, but I still need to step out first Yeah, as a suggestion, would it be possible for us to reorder and take that item last? Sure Yeah, I don't believe anybody That's fine with me. You may want to check in with the members of the public to see if the hotel height is an issue that the members of the public have Ah, very good point. So um Hotel height hope to I see some shaking nose, but maybe I see shaking nose Okay Okay, you did Okay No, we appreciate your comments. They're very good comments And so we're basically trying to understand this well enough and as you said These issues are going to have great impact going forward And so I appreciate sam In event in particular saying that we need to time to ferret out these issues and unravel the difficulty Of understanding some of the major points so we can make a good decision Um, so let's continue on each item But it's presentation only and we may take this meeting and if it gets too late, it's nine o'clock Um, it will consider. I don't know how much more time you have You have an estimate um Well, there were eight eight items plus two very small ones so Probably done by nine 20 9 30 Okay, so 9 30 I'll go as fast as I have one more quick clarification question then so if we're moving the one I need to recuse myself from to the very end Do I just go home? Yeah, we're at that point. Okay She's good on that one Ready, okay ad is reset. Thank you reset So ad is accessory dwelling units when we went through the adoption process with planning commission and city council The the final draft went out in the summer of 2017 Um before the adoption hearings and the legislation that went into place at the beginning of 2018 Made our new zoning code for ad use essentially out of compliance with state Law because of the changes that occurred So actually the document that you have in front of you is in compliance with everything that came into the into law in 2018 And this is the first time we've been able to update it in full. So right now our standard as it is within our A newly adopted code is out of compliance with state law What we did to bring it into compliance is we modified the structure So anything that can be reviewed Administratively as towards the front of the chapter and then any references for deviations to standards It has to be reviewed by the planning commission We brought that to the to the end of the chapter so that within the state process you have to have a Administrative review process is required and by separating the two for items like decreased setbacks the unit Open space and landscaping two-story buildings are height exceptions Those require deviations from the standards and planning commission reviews. So that's just been restructured Um Quick overview of what an internal adu is an attached adu and detached an internal adu is either within the main building or within A detached Existing accessory structure. So the pool house can turn into An adu or the detached garage An attached adu is simply attached to the main structure Main structure and a detached adu is a new detached structure with an adu in it Why does this matter under? The new state regulations Any single family home that's in a single family zone Is allowed to have an internal adu so in Prior to this change within the city of capitol. We had minimum lot size standards So for an attached adu or a detached adu. We still have a minimum lot size of 5 000 square feet For an internal adu in the r1 district. So your single family district. There's no longer a minimum lot size So essentially all your homes in the r1 district Um can be a duplex essentially, but there's there's amounts of how how large your adu can be the size of the actual adu So it's not always an even split, but you can have two units an internal adu in the multifamily Zone or the mixed-use neighborhood zone We can still have a minimum lot size tied to that So we've got that at 4 000 square feet consistent with the original 2018 approval The next update is The new parking standards. So question. Yes question. Um, so in terms of the internal adu My sense That you might have a external exit Mm-hmm. Okay, and it has to comply with Setbacks and stuff fire setbacks. Yeah, okay. That's not the setbacks of the zoning regulations, but fire Just fire. Yeah, so if we have a four or five foot to the the boundary line, that's good enough or so we would any, um Any internal adu that came in we would have to have it reviewed by the fire Department to make sure that it's in compliance with their standards But we couldn't require our setback standards. Okay. Do you know what that is? I don't know Maybe you could bring that back to us Okay, thank you So next the off-street parking requirements were modified so the new parking Requirements actually are cut and paste from the new state regulations. So they have been updated I want to draw to your attention. There's quite a few exceptions for when you need to provide off-street parking But the third one any accessory dwelling unit that's part of the proposed or existing primary residence or an accessory structure They do not need to bring in parking So the only time in which you are required to bring in parking for your adu now is for a new detached unit And there's other exceptions for it if it's within a half mile of a public transit if it's a natural in a national registered district So Parking is becoming not such a requirement for the new adu's Next there's new regulations for conversions of existing garages carports or covered parking And so now under the new regulations, you're allowed to convert your your garage And the you're required to provide off-street parking spaces for the existing single family home So whatever the requirement would be for that existing single family home And the state is very specific that the required spaces may be located in any configuration on the same lot as the accessory dwelling unit Including but not limited to as covered spaces uncovered spaces tandem spaces or by the use of lifts so You essentially get an adu your car gets moved out Into any place on your lot. You just have to provide that parking on the lot And then the adu isn't required covered parking any longer So you I mean in essence it could all go away. It can all go away. Yeah Yeah And then for the adu that space that's just been Utilized to live in That is not required to provide on you're not required to provide on-site parking for the adu space that just took over your garage This is when we can so any questions with that that I just had and and one clarifying that the changes in this section concerning adus are all based on state law They're not coastal commission redlocks. That's correct The only thing that the coastal commission added was a reference to the noticing requirement for If you need a coastal development permit Okay And our city attorney has reviewed this section and it complies with the state right all right. Thanks Density versus flora ratio this we've discussed during the land use Element update for the general plan. So I really don't have many slides on this, but it's just the fact that within the Regional commercial zoning district and the community commercial zoning district that We utilize floor area as a limitation rather than density limits So it was accidentally added. It's never been in the zoning code before and It was in table 17.24 dash three and when we updated the general plan we We said would come back and make this modification taking out the density limits for those two zones any questions No, that was the 20 units per acre that was added Yeah, two questions Um, you mentioned that the city attorney reviewed topic seven Or area seven regarding the ad use Why not all of the document? um, so for the the ones that are So throughout this process the city attorney has reviewed different parts of the code We should during this next Break for this next month read and I have talked about he's going to do a full review Of all the coastal staff edits and in the document, but we've been For for the ones that are really regulated by the state We've been having like what the when the wireless update came For you and this the ad you ordinance We've made sure that they're in line with the state So but talking about setbacks within the r1 district. We haven't depended as heavily On our city attorney for that. I say that they over the course of what the last five years And however many iterations there's been number of lawyers of take to look at it But ultimately until we get to a final product that might be proposed. It's hard to do a holistic review 80 regulations are extremely tightly governed by state law and as a general law city were Subservient to that. So that was a real easy item for her to pull out is just confirm this matches state regulations because we know We're going to be required to not exceed those But as we go forward, we'll definitely be taking a full review Her point is well taken. You don't need me to confirm the 12 foot setback on your side fence But you do have some double checks on things like state regulations that are very complex like ad use and then The broader questions about are these red lines? Permissible are they overreaching? Those are more nuanced examinations that you don't really want to have That discussion until you have something closer to a final product because otherwise you're going to have me review a document That's going to change five times And and just in in trying to follow along I'm noticing they're it's saying topic seven at the top and like the numbers are Different than the discussion items that were so i'm just again trying to follow along and i've been running into Some issues of what we're talking about and where in this Are reflects that and again, you know, so that's just an example Of of what i've been kind of running into are these the discussion tabs that you're referring to the tabs Yes, and did I pick seven but discussion eight so that says topic eight But the next one we'll say if you go again, I bet it's going to say like discussion No, so that one yeah topic that one matches eight Yeah, so I i'm sorry that was an error in my well, and it's throughout the Yeah, it's throughout the slides that i've just noticed Um, but again just for clarification as this comes back to us being really specific in what You know what we're trying to look at here. I that's what I ran into Um And there's notes in embedded in the binder And how is that in relation to what we're you know the red lines? That um, you're asking us to keep or not keep and so forth, so I'd like some clarification on that as well So the notes with the hand. Yeah. Yeah, so that's something that we Incorporated to highlight those areas where the planning commission did not take the recommendation of the coastal commission I didn't want to give you Two sets of this code to show you all the red lines from the coastal commission that the planning commission reviewed This is simply the red lines that have been accepted by the planning commission So to cover our bases and make sure you're aware that they were asking for something different in those circumstances Um, we've been working closely with ben nobel our contracted Person who who has been updating and does all of the updates to the actual zoning code and I think it would be best for prior to the main meeting if I Possibly take back the binders. I can renumber things I think it should be in order from the beginning of the document to the end There was a lot of going back and forth with getting updated chapters from ben a lot of preparation that was You know up to the final hour on this that I definitely see where The confusion lies and I'd like to not Make it confusing next time. So I'll do a better job of that. Thank you. Um, and the last the last part I don't know. Are we going over part one two. There's like these other sections in the binder part one two and Three Like there's different parts. Yeah So how is that in relation to what we're discussing? So what I was what I was highlighting in the staff report were just the really big Changes that occurred from the coastal commission staff and it's in what planning commission changed I'm happy to start at the beginning of this document and go Part by part if that's how the city council would like to go through this document But I for this presentation I thought I would just bring in the highlights for the city council and not knowing how in depth you wanted to get into the document so However, you if you'd like we can start at the beginning and move Through you know with and we we've Actually at the beginning of the planning commission review not on the coastal commission edits, but I remember a couple years back The confusion that came up with just highlighting the larger topics and the need to Really touch base on each section of code so Well, I'm willing to take this offline and what works best for for my reading comfort versus what works for everybody else But you know, ideally it would the backup document in the agenda is what you know, we're we're What I feel should match what you know, what should be given here and so again, that's really confusion for me there's items one through five for discussion items in the backup document and In the backup in the What is this called the staff report? Yeah, and so just to find that but again I could take this offline and talk about what would work better for me in terms of reading this document But thank you Any other questions I do have a question. Uh, probably I don't quite understand this very well. So um, going back um, you were talking about the um The residential density and this was table 17.24 You're on page 24 5 and 6 I think And so you took away the uh denser requirement of 20 units per acre yes, so There's another part in the code on page 40-3 you're talking about permitted residential density And it's affordable housing development units are up to 20 units per acre So it counts here in that case, but not in the other So I'm trying to get an idea of the use of the particular zoning area So it's on page 40-3 Uh section f I was just wondering if there are two different standards So that's in our affordable housing overlay zone. Yeah, so it's different there is that what you're trying to say Affordable housing developments with up to 20 units per acre are permitted in So the affordable housing overlay zone has a density It's a it's a residential overlay zone has a density of 20 units per acre But what we're talking about taking out the 20 units per acre is in the cc and cr districts So it's totally totally different and that that we would regulate density and density of use with the florida ratio Okay That I got but with the overlay we're actually saying we want 20 yeah with with the overlay as a residential Density that's okay got it and we kill we're maintaining that the residential densities in the multi res and the single family Zones, so it's not going away from the residential residential areas. Okay. I remember that that was an issue in cliffwood heights and That came that was part of the agreement. Okay Just want to understand it. Okay. Thank you Okay, uh move on garage exceptions This was a zoning code uh a discrepancy that one of the members of the public brought to the planning commission He submitted public comment. He noted um During the zoning code update a new standard was added to The floor area regulations and a new exception was added for uh lots under 3000 square feet were allowed to have up to 250 square feet Of of garage space that wouldn't be counted towards your far This went back to the issues and options. Um, we had direction from city council To build in an exception for small lots that typically wouldn't have a requirement for covered parking The gentleman that spoke on this brought up the fact that if you're anywhere between a 3000 square foot lot to a 3400 square foot lot You're actually getting less development rights than a 3000 square foot lot So we looked at this and said well, how can we fix the situation? It doesn't seem to be fair So we went back to the original issues and options figured out what the reason was behind this And then found a solution. So if you're on a lot of 2587 square feet or less, you're not required to have covered parking We simply put together an equation that allowed the 250 square foot Exception up for lots up to 2587 square feet And then we added a second equation that kind of creates a plateau. So everyone gets fair the fair Difference between the two and it creates a more of a technical Mathematic challenge under our garage exceptions But we have updated the code to make it fair and so that larger lots are getting The advantage of the smaller lots Not a question there too. Where's the 1750 come from? 1750 Is the floor area that can be achieved on a 2586 square foot lot. So it's making sure that That plateau line that goes across Is at 1750. Oh on the graph the green. Yeah So they get the difference I have to admit I'm going to think about this a little bit more that thank you Yeah, this is just a fix basically that we'd built in this allowance for small lots to have these Cost-free garages basically and so suddenly if you were one square foot over the minimum size Your house got smaller and that wasn't really the intent And so this is a just sort of a fix to that to make it so that okay You know if your lot happens to be 3000 and one square feet You don't get less lot than the guy that has a 2999 square foot lot So this is just a fix there. It was something that was identified by the planning commission So the 1750 is according to here a garage exclusion the area of a garage exclusion That's what it says here Area of garage exclusion. That's the 1750 maximum floor area for lot size equals the garage exclusion Oh, no, it's the minus. Okay. That's your equation. That's your equation. So the equation is down here in the note Okay, thank you very much. Okay Also in this review, uh, there was a discussion about ancillary space So one of the I think one of the best changes to come about in this code is currently the way we Require parking how many parking spaces you have we actually include the floor area of the garage in that calculation The new zoning code does not Include the floor area of the required parking space within your garage. So that 10 by 20 space This they also added an exception for ancillary space within a garage up to 125 square feet To not count towards your parking calculation So if you have a garage it has your 10 by 20 area of your parking space And then it also has because a parking space is required to be 10 feet by 20 feet And it also has built in if your garage has up to 125 feet. It can be less Um of ancillary space to say put a bicycle surfboard That a washing machine it doesn't count towards your parking requirement. It will count towards your floor area of the overall home Any questions These two are really quick additional items. Um That were found that didn't carry over from the old code And with that I just want to say as we review this zoning code It's good practice in all cities To update your zoning code on an annual or every other year Basis and we're going to continue to find these items that we did not catch. We're trying We've made tables to make sure everything carries over from one code to the next But there are going to be items that come up and we'll have to continue to update This is one of them within our vacation Rental overlay the enforcement Requirements for vacation rental overlay. We're in a separate chapter of our Transient rental overlay and they didn't get caught from that other chapter. So we were now suggesting that we Incorporate them. This is on page 40-8 in your code Um This was not reviewed by the planning commission. So this definitely will be Highlighted when it's brought back to the planning commission. It doesn't have their recommendation the Any questions on that? This is what we can hold the air bnb is to to say you can't advertise Unless it's within the vacation rental overlay and So we'll get rid of all's advertising and Um The other one was single room occupancy single room occupancy Didn't carry over from the old code because it was in the definitions within the parking chapter and not in the definitions section And what it is is a dwelling unit with a kitchen facility, which is 400 square feet or less So that now will be added to the definitions and it's listed Under our parking regulations as a type of use single room occupancy And those are the two highlighted changes that I wanted to bring to you. So With that we can talk about the hotel height and Council member peterson can have a nice evening Thank you very much. Thank you You were gonna give me a ride home I'm walking I know Do you want to do you want to keep the binders? Yeah, why don't I keep the binder and bring it back to you? I still have things I want to talk about Then go ahead and keep it I'll send you an email when I need I'm gonna at some point. I'll ask for it back just so I can renumber things for you Sure. I'll just take pictures of the pages. I took notes on I'll send you an email. Thank you Okay Okay, okay, so village hotel and height The coastal commission requested Our original requirement for the village hotel height Matches what is in our general plan and that is to increase the maximum permitted building height to provide that the maximum height of the hotel Remains below The elevation of the bluff behind the hotel and the coastal commission asked that We revised the the language to say the maximum height of the hotel Including all rooftop architectural elements such as chimneys cupolas, etc And all mechanical are printed Such as elevator shafts h vac units, etc remain at least 10 feet below the top elevation of the bluff behind the hotel The planning commission did not accept these changes They said we want to keep as much flexibility built into the Standard so that we can review the hotel at the time that it's submitted And we don't not knowing what will be submitted. They like the standard of just maintaining the That it's below the elevation of the bluff behind the hotel And that the second standard says the bluff behind the hotel remains visible And it originally said from the capitol a wharf is a green edge With existing mature trees maintained on site The coastal commission asked that the bluff behind the hotel remains visible from cliff drive And they also had added the beach which we talked through and the beach wasn't reasonable because at a lower elevation looking up You'd never see that and So here's the view of where the future hotel will be in their request for the 10 feet below the elevation of the bluff This is I thought we should put more specificity in the sorry southern And the southern parking lot of the cliff drive the view And the planning commission's Recommendation again was not to accept the 10 foot or all of the other the discussions on The specifics of what could be within that those 10 feet And to add one view from the southern parking lot Along the bluff of cliff drive so That's where the planning commission recommendation ended Any discussion? Well, thank you. That concludes my presentation this evening. Thank you That concludes the city council meeting I move adjournment. No, sorry one more comment. I just wanted I had one follow-up a question about Um The timing on the geologic hazard section and the non conforming parcels With the coastal commission. Do we have a sense of When that may that would be after certification of the The portion of the code that you're looking at at this point So I think it's months one year. I think it's several years out I think we want to see what happens with some of the other larger jurisdictions Okay, and you know I think we get a little bit of guidance about where the where landing zones might be So it's going to take a while I think for some of these bigger jurisdictions to work this through with the coastal commission Yeah, I yeah, I did have one request of reading But I've told you personally already but I'll make it in public and that is to um Do some research on the escalona drive. I'd like to know that whole area that is um Been planned, but not owned or not known. Who owns it or what other kind of conditions are on it in terms Yeah, you know what I'm talking about. Yeah, okay. So can I follow up on? Commission council member stories question at planning commission We said we could come back as soon as the certification is done And I think I just want to echo Jamie's comments at the direction of city council if you Um, think it would be wise for us to wait until some of the larger jurisdictions have gone through their geological hazards And they're non conforming. I think that would be a good avenue But as far as the conversations in front of planning commission have gone so far We have committed to you know, it would be following the certification And then of course we'd look to you to see when you'd like us to begin those efforts. I see. Okay. Thank you Okay, meeting adjourned. Thank you very much for everyone coming Thank you